Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

High density porous polyethylene material (Medpor) as an unwrapped orbital implant

  • Published:
Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE B Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective: To introduce the clinical effect among patients who received an unwrapped orbital implant with high density porous polyethylene material (Medpor) after enucleation or evisceration. Methods: Retrospective analysis of a series of 302 patients with anophthalmia who underwent placement of an unwrapped high density porous polyethylene orbital implant. We compared the patients (n=180) who accepted primary implant placement with those (n=122) who accepted secondary implant placement. Parameters evaluated included: age at time of surgery, date of surgery, sex, implant type and size, surgery type, the surgical procedure and technique performed, and complications. Results: The time of follow-up ranged from 2.0 to 58.0 months (mean 32.5 months). A total of 5 of 302 (1.66%) cases had documented postoperative complications. The following problems were noted after surgery: implant exposure, 3 patients (0.99%); implant removed due to orbital infection, 1 patient (0.34%); ptosis, 1 patient (0.34%). There were no significant complications observed in other 297 cases and all implants showed good orbital motility. The clinical effect of primary implant placement is better than that of secondary placement. Conclusion: High density porous polyethylene material can be used successfully as an unwrapped orbital implant in anopthalmic socket surgery with minimal complications. The material is well tolerated, nonantigenic and has low rate of infection and migration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Buetter, H., Bartley, G.B., 1992. Tissue breakdown and exposure associated with orbital hydroxyapatite implants. Am. J. Ophthalmol., 113:669–673.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Potter, P., Duprez, T., Cosnard, G., 2000. Postcontrast magnetic resonance imaging assessment of porous polyethylene orbital implant (Medpor). Ophthalmology, 107(9):1656–1660. [doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(00)00249-9]

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gayre, G.S., De, B.C., Lipham, W., 2001. Bovine pericardium as a wrapping for orbital implants. Ophthal. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 17:381–387. [doi:10.1097/00002341-200109000-00014]

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, D.R., Klapper, S.R., 1999. Wrapping hydroxyapatite implants. Ophthalmic. Surg. Lasers, 30:403–407.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, D.R., Gilberg, S., Mawn, L., 1998. The synthetic hydroxyapatite implant: a report on 65 patients. Ophthal. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 14:250–255.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kao, S.C., Chen, S., 1999. The use of rectus abdominis sheath for wrapping of the hydroxyapatite orbital implants. Ophthalmic. Surg. Lasers, 30:69–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karesh, J.W., Dresner, S.C., 1994. High-density porous polyethylene (Medpor) as a successful anophthalmic socket implant. Ophthalmology, 101:1688–1696.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, V., Subak, S.I., Hungerford, J.L., 2000. Exposure of primary orbital implants in postenucleation retinoblastoma patients. Ophthalmology, 107(5):940–946. [doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(00)00016-6]

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • MeNab, A., 1995. Hydroxyapatite orbital implants. Experience with 100 cases. Aust. N. Z. J. Ophthalmol., 23:117–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naugle, T.C., Lee, A.M., Haik, B.G., Callahan, M.A., 1999. Wrpping hydroxylapatite orbital implants with posterior auricular muscle complex grafts. Am. J. Ophthalmol., 128(4):495–501. [doi:10.1016/S0002-9394(99)00159-2]

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oestreicher, J.H., Liu, E., Berkowitz, M., 1997. Complications of hydroxyapatite orbital implants. A review of 100 consecutive cases and a comparison of Dexon mesh (polyglycolic acid) with scleral wrapping. Ophthalmology, 104:324–329.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, A.C., 1991. Advances in enucleation. Ophthalmol. Clin. North Am., 4:173–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remulla, H.D., Rubin, P.A., Shore, J.W., 1995. Complications of porous spherical orbital hydroxyapatite implants. Ophthalmology, 102:586–593.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trichopoulos, N., Augsburger, J.J., 2005. Enucleation with unwrapped porous and noporous orbital implants: a 15-year experience. Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 21(5):331–336. [doi:10.1097/01.iop.0000175034.88019.a5]

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Acker, E., de Potter, P., 2001. Implant orbitaire en polyethylene poreux (Medpor). J. Fr. Ophthalmol., 24:1067–1073.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Eye Center, the First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310015, China

    Chen Yan-hong & Cui Hong-guang

Authors
  1. Chen Yan-hong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cui Hong-guang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cui Hong-guang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chen, Yh., Cui, Hg. High density porous polyethylene material (Medpor) as an unwrapped orbital implant. J. Zhejiang Univ. - Sci. B 7, 679–682 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.2006.B0679

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.2006.B0679

Key words

CLC number

Search

Navigation